Peter Pan & Wendy (Live-Action)

[Marce82]

One if my biggest issues was the ending:

so.... Neverland is 100% real in this movie, and Peter goes back ALONE to live out there forever? What happens to the lost boys? Orphanage?
In most (if not all iterations), the whole adventure could be considered a shared dream... maybe it happened, maybe it didn't. And the idea is that other kids will be whisked off to Neverland in the future ("it has happened before, it will happen again")... but in this one, I guess it will be Peter ALONE??? Gee, that's fun.

[D82]

The score did have a couple of references to the original songs.

Oh, OK. That's what I imagined. Thanks for the info!

The songs are nothing to write home about. I don't understand why they bothered to write a couple of new generic Pirate songs when they have the very memorable and beloved A Pirate's Life and Never Smile at a Crocodile. They could have even used the cut The Boatswain Song or The Pirate Song.

I agree. It's very similar to what they did in Pinocchio, where they also added three new unmemorable songs, though there they kept some of the original ones.

Disney and their hardcore fans love to pretend the sludge they churn out that gets poorly reviewed online is due to them being "woke". That way they never actually have to improve their product.

But there's a lot of racism too. I've seen many racist comments about the film online the past few weeks, and I think in this case, that has something to do with the extremely low audience score. It's true this is probably a movie critics might enjoy more than the general public because of its tone and other elements, so maybe it would still have a low audience score in spite of those things, but I don't think it would be THAT low. Anyway, as I said, I still haven't seen it. Maybe, I'll think differently when I do.

[Disney's Divinity]

I don't think a bunch of 1-star reviews are that suspicious considering how bad this has looked from the first we saw of it. The truth is the average person doesn't think much when they rate things like a critic does. I imagine most people usually go either for a 10 (loved it), a 5 (it was okay...), or a 1 (terrible).

[Vlad]

It was terrible. Everything that made the animation so great was missing here. No magic, no fun, no comedy. The whole "You Can Fly" sequence had nothing of the magic that the animated film had. I absolutely hated how dark everything was. The only thing I liked was Tinker Bell herself. Peter Pan looks like a teenager Mowgli, the actor was terribly miscast. Hook was such an awful character, the backstory was so ridiculous. The new songs were so silly and unmemorable. And that ending...

I'd say it was more or less the same as Pinocchio. Equally awful.
From what I see online, audiences hate it. I myself didn't expect much, but it still managed to disappoint me.

[carolinakid]

Great review, Vlad!

It’s amusing to see the mainstream media (not all but enough) falling over themselves praising this crap.
Writing things like A Pan for modern families and Neverland Magic is still there.
Another bomb from Woke Disney.

A favorite...Peter Panned by Rotten Tomatoes

[Marce82]

Well, to be honest, I don't think wokeness has much to do with the failures of this film. It's just poorly crafted in every discipline.

Oh, I have a questions for those who have seen the film: so the big "death scare for Peter Pan" is that he falls down a few flights inside those ruins??? IS THAT IT? Why he isn't there to save the kids at first during the finale on the ship?

I generally agree with Vlad's thoughts. Although I don't mind the non-white Peter Pan, he was a terrible actor. There was no humor, no whimsy to him. And no grace at all when he flew.

As for Tinkerbell... I don't think she was good, but it's mainly not the actress' fault: the director kept cutting to closeups of her in the middle of scenes (which totally killed the flow of the action;, the film Hook is also somewhat guilty of this), and the problem here is that it's a pantomime character, so only focusing on her face doesn't allow the actress to use her whole body to express herself.

Spoilery note: all of Tinkerbell's storylines are cut out of this film. She is no longer jealous, tries to kill wendy, have any scenes with Hook and never saves Peter Pan from a bomb.

[Disney's Divinity]

Spoilery note: all of Tinkerbell's storylines are cut out of this film. She is no longer jealous, tries to kill wendy, have any scenes with Hook and never saves Peter Pan from a bomb.

*SPOILERS* Well, I'm glad Tinker Bell doesn't try to murder Wendy anymore, but I think they went overboard. I would be fine with her being jealous still, and I thought Tinker Bell's almost-death was partly inspired by the play and how people would clap for her to live or something along those lines. So what is the purpose of the Tinker Bell character here?

[Sotiris]

Well, to be honest, I don't think wokeness has much to do with the failures of this film. It's just poorly crafted in every discipline.

Unfortunately, the two are often interconnected. When your main preoccupation as a filmmaker or a studio is to address every little criticism levied at the original and your goal is to make it as inoffensive as possible and check every diversity and representation box imaginable, things like storytelling, plot, and characterization inevitably take a back seat.

[Farerb]

After seeing the audience score for this on both Rotten Tomatoes and IMDB, Little Mermaid live action fans on twitter are preparing for war and started creating multiple accounts on both sites.

[carolinakid]

Re: Tinker Bell. Some reviews said the character seemed like an afterthought who could have been inserted anywhere in it, even after the film was done.

I haven’t seen it and have no plans to.

[Vlad]

Well, to be honest, I don't think wokeness has much to do with the failures of this film. It's just poorly crafted in every discipline.

Unfortunately, the two are often interconnected. When your main preoccupation as a filmmaker or a studio is to address every little criticism levied at the original and your goal is to make it as inoffensive as possible and check every diversity and representation box imaginable, things like storytelling, plot, and characterization inevitably take a back seat.

Exactly.

[Patricier21]

Re: Tinker Bell. Some reviews said the character seemed like an afterthought who could have been inserted anywhere in it, even after the film was done.

I haven’t seen it and have no plans to.

I wouldn’t really state that, No less than how Iago, Who is much more obviously re-inserted into reshoot as an afterthought in the live action Aladdin, but of course if you do not check it out for yourself, you may never know.

I personally quite like it, MUCH more than the 2003 movie and even more so then Hook, Which I recently saw for the first time as well, and I am quite fond of and get a lot out of Peter Pan in general, so.....

[Patricier21]

This is going to be a long post, With a bit of a long rant, but please be considerable.What I have noticed about this movie, in regards to the overall reactions towards it is that ironically, it is a reflection of the reality and times that we currently live in. Like how Disney, let alone if not all most other film studios make their content not only in style, but overall well,content, and the way that they portray and execute it, which is style overall, but you get what I mean, right? Is both reactive and reflective of the time and reality that they are made in, including the way that people think and react towards things, once again “getting with the times”, so to speak, like how others have stated that Disney of course had to with a lot of their content, most noticeably from the 80s onwards.

Anyways, with people’s criticisms that Neverland (let alone most other things) in this movie “lacks any real magic”, which I overall disagree with, even if it may not seem as such at times, well, interestingly enough it reminds me of a comment that someone made in regards to the state of the David Yates Harry Potter movies per the final line of Deathly Hallows Part 1: “I want to bury him properly, no magic!” which that person said is in regards to how Yates overall handled his Harry Potter movies, Notwithstanding also taking some stylistic choices and cues from some of the previous movies before him.He focussed a little too much on trying to have it overall be “realistic”, that he seriously overdid it, especially in regards to desaturating and taking away all the colouring/lighting to subtly state how dark and gritty that world has become, and how supposedly “realistic” those kinds of things would be experienced in real life, that you literally cannot see a thing, especially in Deathly Hallows Part 2 during the main part of the Battle of Hogwarts, which is essentially the entire movie, in which as a result, it becomes hard to care about what is going on and have any true attachment, even as a true, avid, hard core fan, so that when we can actually see and (supposedly) feel something, you either don’t feel anything and or it becomes truly hard to, because of these kinds of things hindering it, let alone what’s there also feels very mediocre overall, and not really, to put it generously, as if anything else involved, from the actors, to the editing, to the music etc is truly giving it all that they’ve got, all overall coming off as if they would rather be anywhere else but there, having a “let’s just get this over with”/“we’re tired of doing this” attitude, which with it all has it overall come off as truly being the biggest cash grab that I’ve ever experienced in my life.Even more so than a lot of other things that most other people would consider “cash grabs” that I can considerably see, despite my digression towards them.Because, overall, they still felt like and expressed what they were trying to say and accomplish, in a satisfying, if not perfect or even as good as it could’ve been way, still overall being true to what they are connected and related to as well, which it goes without saying is a lot more then I can say about Deathly Hallows Part 2, and even all of the other David Yates Harry Potter movies overall as well.

And I know, regardless of their overall reception, that deep down, everyone else, even those who are supposedly stating that they “like” them overall agree with me, based on the fact that they are rarely ever brought up, especially by casuals as being their favourite Harry Potter/Wizarding World movies, or if so, it’s more then probably influenced by how “Successful” they have overall been received, and to disagree is more then likely being done out of fear for having it “look bad for you” for whatever reason, because you are disagreeing with something that is subjective and either way have a lot of fairly objective problems with it.More proof of this is why several people, including quite a lot I know in person did not even go and check out the first Fantastic Beasts movie (and remember, this is the first one, the (supposedly) best received one out of all of them) even after their high praise for Deathly Hallows Part 2, all of whom are major Harry Potter fans, and all of whom in particular are around the age/would be able to relate to the characters in Fantastic Beasts, more than perhaps even more so than in Harry Potter, to the point where I even more than think that even those who don’t like Harry Potter may very well actually like Fantastic Beasts.

So can you see where I’m coming from here? If you’re able to accept the later Harry Potter movies for being dark at times more than nearly impossible to see let alone connect to anything, and not just in its visuals, yet when Fantastic Beasts comes around, no one is apparently interested enough to even really give the first one a chance (despite its overall success), with it going back to more of the overall feeling of these pre-“darker“ movies. I do know there’s other factors involved with its overall reception here, but even those I find quite hard to believe, especially for supposedly true “hard core” fans. I know that they can be overly ambitious, and with that considerably confusing and convoluted in parts, bu really, what’s the difference between them and Christopher Nolan’s movies? The Star Wars movies overall especially to non-hard-core fans? The Pirates of the Caribbean movies etc.?

Again, the rant above is to help with my overall claims about Peter Pan and Wendy here, let alone the other Disney Live Action remakes and most of modern cinema. Because people reacted so (again, supposedly) strongly to what the later Harry Potter movies did, Disney and other studios took this as a sign that this is apparently what modern audiences (particularly those interested in fantasy) overall want.You can definitely see this kind of thing in their earlier successes with the first Live Action Alice, as well as the first Maleficent. The sequels for both did not do as well, and while I definitely do not think that this is the main reason why, you notice particularly for the second Live Action Alice, Through the Looking Glass that it’s not as “dark“, nor is it according to at least one or two reviewers “truly Lewis Caroll”, so to speak (Which I can state more than critically, having studied the original Alice in Wonderland text in university that they are wrong), Which as a result of that movie’s overall failure (as well as considerably the overall reaction to similar kinds of things like Fantastic Beasts, for example), more than perhaps caused them to not be as “creative”, hence again why we have Peter Pan and Wendy here, as well as the Live Action Lion King (which again, do not forget is monumentally successful), not only NOT taking more “fun” creative risks with them, but are also darker and more mature in their tone and (especially visual) style, because that overall worked for them earlier, at least way more than then them going in various ways “lighter”, even regardless of Live Action Aladdin for example proving successful, but you also have to keep in mind that unlike Aladdin, there are also many adaptations of Peter Pan, including the 2003 one that you all supposedly love, which as a result, they have to make this new Peter Pan stand out, and as such can not do more or less the exact same thing as 2003 Peter Pan, or 2015 Pan Or even Hook etc. because then it would be even more “pointless” and what better way to portray it overall than having it be “darker” and more serious since that is apparently what overall has worked, both Disney or non-, EH?

Like I always say, YOU make everything happen in your life, no one else does, no matter what no matter how otherwise it may seem. Also, not always specifically necessarily, but I have also discovered that overall, the reason why you don’t like something is because it reminds you about something about you that you don’t like. Think about what it is you don’t like about this movie, even if you haven’t actually seen it, And please at least consider all that I’ve said here, let alone with any other movie, and or anything else similarly for that matter, that comparably has similar “problems” and “issues”.

[D82]

I've finally seen the film and I understand a bit both the critics and the Internet audience. On the one hand, it has interesting ideas and themes, and I think the cast is good in general. But then, there are some things that are quite silly, like for example, that Hook didn't find Peter Pan's hideout earlier when he had been there before with Peter. It reminded me of the Mulan remake in that respect. Many people's main issue is the racebending of some of the characters, but I'd say that didn't really affect the story. Most of the changes were actually to make the story more feminist. Sometimes I think it worked, but other times it felt a bit forced. Girls being included among the Lost Boys wasn't one of my issues, though. I actually always found it a bit weird that the group was comprised of just boys. I don't know if you've noticed, but there were women pirates in Hook's crew as well.

I personally found the actor who plays Peter Pan quite likeable in the role and I think he looked great as the character, but I think he didn't have enough screen time and importance in the story for a film with his name in the title. My brother said the movie should have been called Wendy and Peter Pan or just Wendy instead.

Something noteworthy is also that there's no romance at all in the movie. At least, I didn't notice anyone having a crush on anybody. I didn't have an issue with that, but I found it curious.

But the worst thing, in my opinion, is something others have also mentioned; that there aren't many moments when the characters have fun and are just enjoying Neverland, and I think that was something important to show. Otherwise, what's the point of going to this magical place where children don't have to grow up? They barely even explore the land. The mermaids, for instance, just appear in the shot shown in the trailer. Same with Tiger Lily's tribe. They kids are just thrust into the adventure since the moment they arrive and don't have many moments to relax. The drab cinematography was an odd choice, but my issue was more what I've explained.

Anyway, if I hadn't seen the animated original maybe I would've though this one was OK, but compared to it, it's quite inferior. It's not among the very worst live-action remakes to me, though.

Regarding the music, the new lullaby wasn't that bad now that I've listened to it more and it was quite important in the story. It's sung twice actually, as there's a version performed by Wendy. The pirate songs are more forgettable. I noticed "You Can Fly" is the only title from the original listed in the credits even though some moments of the score seemed inspired by other melodies from the original. I really liked the way "You Can Fly" was used in the score. The way the composer adapted it and mixed it with the new music was quite clever, in my opinion. I found the score quite good in general too. Speaking of that, here's a soundtrack playlist, for anyone interested.

Why is Wendy so horrible to her mother??? Unprovoked!!

I think I must have missed what Wendy did to her mother, because at the end when she apologizes to her I didn't understand why she was doing it. And I thought her parents would decide she didn't have to go to boarding school at the end, but that didn't happen.

Regarding the backstory... I got the impression that "James" got kicked out by Peter because he didn't like him missing his mother. Either way. STUPID.

That's what I understood too. I actually thought the backstory wasn't bad, and in my opinion Jude Law did a good job, but I think they made Hook a bit too sympathetic, and not menacing enough as a result, towards the end.

Fareb, the native Americans are basically cut out of this film... there is only a quick glimpse at their village, and they never talk or interact with the cast. The only one is Tigerlily, who is a teen/adult in this version. And she is so wise/stoic/mature (boring)... and I am still not sure why/how she is involved with the lost boys.

Tiger Lily's role was quite expanded, but it's true that the rest of her tribe barely appeared. As for why she's with the Lost Boys, I think she's just friends with Peter Pan and them. It's true that even though she was given a more important role in the story, she wasn't too developed as a character. I didn't dislike her, though.

Speaking of her, what was in the prequel novel about her tribe having the ability to choose whether to grow up or not wasn't in the movie at all. And it seems the fast fins and Ariel and her sisters having superpowers is not in the The Little Mermaid either, so I guess we shouldn't take prequel novels too seriously.

One if my biggest issues was the ending:

so.... Neverland is 100% real in this movie, and Peter goes back ALONE to live out there forever? What happens to the lost boys? Orphanage?
In most (if not all iterations), the whole adventure could be considered a shared dream... maybe it happened, maybe it didn't. And the idea is that other kids will be whisked off to Neverland in the future ("it has happened before, it will happen again")... but in this one, I guess it will be Peter ALONE??? Gee, that's fun.

Well, he still has Tinker Bell, Tiger Lily and also Hook since it seems they're friends again by the end, but yeah, he'll probably be a bit lonelier. As for the Lost Boys, maybe they are adopted by the Darlings? Someone here mentioned that's what happens in the original source material, but it's true it's not clear in the movie what happens to them. Plus, there are lots of them. Could the Darlings adopt them all?

Oh, I have a questions for those who have seen the film: so the big "death scare for Peter Pan" is that he falls down a few flights inside those ruins??? IS THAT IT? Why he isn't there to save the kids at first during the finale on the ship?

Well, he was also wounded by Hook, but the scene is so dark that I wasn't sure at first if that's what had happened. But later Tiger Lily heals the wound on his chest with some herbs or something. That's why I knew I hadn't imagined it.

Spoilery note: all of Tinkerbell's storylines are cut out of this film. She is no longer jealous, tries to kill wendy, have any scenes with Hook and never saves Peter Pan from a bomb.

Yeah, her role was surprisingly reduced. There's one moment she gets to do something heroic (when she saves Wendy after walking the plank and makes the ship fly), but she doesn't get much to do. I guess it's partly due to Tiger Lily and Wendy getting more screen time. There are some hints that she doesn't totally like Wendy at first, but it's very subtle and brief.

I don't think a bunch of 1-star reviews are that suspicious considering how bad this has looked from the first we saw of it. The truth is the average person doesn't think much when they rate things like a critic does. I imagine most people usually go either for a 10 (loved it), a 5 (it was okay...), or a 1 (terrible).

Well, I've never rated a movie on a site like Rotten Tomatoes, but personally, I don't imagine I'd give many movies such extreme scores as a 1 or a 10, as usually there's always something to enjoy even in the bad movies and few movies are totally perfect. But maybe other people do what you say, I have no idea. Anyway, I remember when Strange World was released, I read many of the audience reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and most of the people who gave it 1 or 2 stars mentioned they didn't like the LGBT representation, so that makes me suspect at least part of the 1 votes come from these people, the same way many of the 10s probably come from the opposite kind of people. If review bombing is actually happening, I don't think they should've bothered to do so, as it probably would have had a low audience score anyway.

After seeing the audience score for this on both Rotten Tomatoes and IMDB, Little Mermaid live action fans on twitter are preparing for war and started creating multiple accounts on both sites.

I think we can expect many 1 and 10 stars on its IMDb score then.

[Sotiris]

This is the only thing they care about.

How Peter Pan & Wendy attempts to correct Disney's racist history with the story
https://ew.com/movies/peter-pan-and-wen ... t-history/

[Thumper_93]

I tried to watch it yesterday and I didn't finish it. As one of you said before everything is very dark. I don't see any coherence between the scenes. It seems that they recorded the scenes and they put them together with moviemaker to make the movie. Everything happens very fast. Wendy and her brothers meet Peter very soon and the presentation of Peter is ridiculous. In the animation movie it was better. Tinker Bell is great but I miss the behaviour of the original one.
Wendy is another generic feminist character in this version. She doesn't look like Wendy to me.
I think that today Disney doesn't have magic anymore. All the movies that they make is to earn fast money. They don't have the soul and the spirit that they used to have....

[DisneyFan09]

Well, after having seen the movie, I must say that I`m torn about it. It wasn`t a particularly bad remake, as it did have some genuine moments of magic now and then. It was visually stunning, the effects were nice and the score was fine. But it still was a flawed movie as a whole, since it suffered from many structural faults. Sure, many of the choices were mandatory and expected: To make Tinker Bell more sympathetic and less callous, making Wendy a feminist and giving Tiger Lily more screentime and making her a more fleshed-out character. And most of the actors were fine (especially Wendy, who looks like a younger sister of Susan from Narnia). With the exception of Alexander Molony as Peter Pan, who was completely dull and bland. But it suffered from a what (in my opinion) most of the remakes have suffered from: Of rushing the story. But most of all, Peter Pan and Wendy suffered from a cluttered screenplay.
First of all, it introduced Wendy the worst way possible, of having her blaming her brothers for the game (despite truth to be told, Wendy became more tolerable afterwads). The backstory of Peter banishing Hook for missing his mother was just insipid and dumb, as it make Peter more unlikable than he needed to be. Even the final scene between Peter and Hook was not satisfying, since there was no real closure between them. Besides, to have the Lost Boys leaving NeverLand for London was also contrived: Since the movie never gave them a real reason for wanting to grow up and their arc was non-existent. So overall, not a bad remake. In fact, I found it superior to last years Pinocchio. But it`s still a flawed and uneven one.

[Disney's Divinity]

Personally, I'm glad Wendy sounds like she has even more here than in the original. She was always my favorite character in the original. Her, Nana, and Smee. I also liked Hook and Tik Tok, but the rest of the characters, not so much. The only thing I'm really looking forward to is Wendy slapping Peter.

the same way many of the 10s probably come from the opposite kind of people. If review bombing is actually happening, I don't think they should've bothered to do so, as it probably would have had a low audience score anyway.

Good point about some of the 10's coming from the opposite crowd who want to pretend like dreck is Oscar-worthy now for the obvious reasons. Now I feel even more like the 20% audience reception is probably even less to do with review bombing, considering those two halves are likely neutralizing each other's votes.

[Vlad]

I checked Rotten Tomatoes, and I was very surprised to see that critics actually liked it. What was there to like? It was a mess, from start to finish.

[Patricier21]

I've finally seen the film and I understand a bit both the critics and the Internet audience. On the one hand, it has interesting ideas and themes, and I think the cast is good in general. But then, there are some things that are quite silly, like for example, that Hook didn't find Peter Pan's hideout earlier when he had been there before with Peter. It reminded me of the Mulan remake in that respect. Many people's main issue is the racebending of some of the characters, but I'd say that didn't really affect the story. Most of the changes were actually to make the story more feminist. Sometimes I think it worked, but other times it felt a bit forced. Girls being included among the Lost Boys wasn't one of my issues, though. I actually always found it a bit weird that the group was comprised of just boys. I don't know if you've noticed, but there were women pirates in Hook's crew as well.

I personally found the actor who plays Peter Pan quite likeable in the role and I think he looked great as the character, but I think he didn't have enough screen time and importance in the story for a film with his name in the title. My brother said the movie should have been called Wendy and Peter Pan or just Wendy instead.

Something noteworthy is also that there's no romance at all in the movie. At least, I didn't notice anyone having a crush on anybody. I didn't have an issue with that, but I found it curious.

But the worst thing, in my opinion, is something others have also mentioned; that there aren't many moments when the characters have fun and are just enjoying Neverland, and I think that was something important to show. Otherwise, what's the point of going to this magical place where children don't have to grow up? They barely even explore the land. The mermaids, for instance, just appear in the shot shown in the trailer. Same with Tiger Lily's tribe. They kids are just thrust into the adventure since the moment they arrive and don't have many moments to relax. The drab cinematography was an odd choice, but my issue was more what I've explained.

Anyway, if I hadn't seen the animated original maybe I would've though this one was OK, but compared to it, it's quite inferior. It's not among the very worst live-action remakes to me, though.

Regarding the music, the new lullaby wasn't that bad now that I've listened to it more and it was quite important in the story. It's sung twice actually, as there's a version performed by Wendy. The pirate songs are more forgettable. I noticed "You Can Fly" is the only title from the original listed in the credits even though some moments of the score seemed inspired by other melodies from the original. I really liked the way "You Can Fly" was used in the score. The way the composer adapted it and mixed it with the new music was quite clever, in my opinion. I found the score quite good in general too. Speaking of that, here's a soundtrack playlist, for anyone interested.

Why is Wendy so horrible to her mother??? Unprovoked!!

I think I must have missed what Wendy did to her mother, because at the end when she apologizes to her I didn't understand why she was doing it. And I thought her parents would decide she didn't have to go to boarding school at the end, but that didn't happen.

Regarding the backstory... I got the impression that "James" got kicked out by Peter because he didn't like him missing his mother. Either way. STUPID.

That's what I understood too. I actually thought the backstory wasn't bad, and in my opinion Jude Law did a good job, but I think they made Hook a bit too sympathetic, and not menacing enough as a result, towards the end.

Fareb, the native Americans are basically cut out of this film... there is only a quick glimpse at their village, and they never talk or interact with the cast. The only one is Tigerlily, who is a teen/adult in this version. And she is so wise/stoic/mature (boring)... and I am still not sure why/how she is involved with the lost boys.

Tiger Lily's role was quite expanded, but it's true that the rest of her tribe barely appeared. As for why she's with the Lost Boys, I think she's just friends with Peter Pan and them. It's true that even though she was given a more important role in the story, she wasn't too developed as a character. I didn't dislike her, though.

Speaking of her, what was in the prequel novel about her tribe having the ability to choose whether to grow up or not wasn't in the movie at all. And it seems the fast fins and Ariel and her sisters having superpowers is not in the The Little Mermaid either, so I guess we shouldn't take prequel novels too seriously.

One if my biggest issues was the ending:

so.... Neverland is 100% real in this movie, and Peter goes back ALONE to live out there forever? What happens to the lost boys? Orphanage?
In most (if not all iterations), the whole adventure could be considered a shared dream... maybe it happened, maybe it didn't. And the idea is that other kids will be whisked off to Neverland in the future ("it has happened before, it will happen again")... but in this one, I guess it will be Peter ALONE??? Gee, that's fun.

Well, he still has Tinker Bell, Tiger Lily and also Hook since it seems they're friends again by the end, but yeah, he'll probably be a bit lonelier. As for the Lost Boys, maybe they are adopted by the Darlings? Someone here mentioned that's what happens in the original source material, but it's true it's not clear in the movie what happens to them. Plus, there are lots of them. Could the Darlings adopt them all?

Oh, I have a questions for those who have seen the film: so the big "death scare for Peter Pan" is that he falls down a few flights inside those ruins??? IS THAT IT? Why he isn't there to save the kids at first during the finale on the ship?

Well, he was also wounded by Hook, but the scene is so dark that I wasn't sure at first if that's what had happened. But later Tiger Lily heals the wound on his chest with some herbs or something. That's why I knew I hadn't imagined it.

Spoilery note: all of Tinkerbell's storylines are cut out of this film. She is no longer jealous, tries to kill wendy, have any scenes with Hook and never saves Peter Pan from a bomb.

Yeah, her role was surprisingly reduced. There's one moment she gets to do something heroic (when she saves Wendy after walking the plank and makes the ship fly), but she doesn't get much to do. I guess it's partly due to Tiger Lily and Wendy getting more screen time. There are some hints that she doesn't totally like Wendy at first, but it's very subtle and brief.

I don't think a bunch of 1-star reviews are that suspicious considering how bad this has looked from the first we saw of it. The truth is the average person doesn't think much when they rate things like a critic does. I imagine most people usually go either for a 10 (loved it), a 5 (it was okay...), or a 1 (terrible).

Well, I've never rated a movie on a site like Rotten Tomatoes, but personally, I don't imagine I'd give many movies such extreme scores as a 1 or a 10, as usually there's always something to enjoy even in the bad movies and few movies are totally perfect. But maybe other people do what you say, I have no idea. Anyway, I remember when Strange World was released, I read many of the audience reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and most of the people who gave it 1 or 2 stars mentioned they didn't like the LGBT representation, so that makes me suspect at least part of the 1 votes come from these people, the same way many of the 10s probably come from the opposite kind of people. If review bombing is actually happening, I don't think they should've bothered to do so, as it probably would have had a low audience score anyway.

After seeing the audience score for this on both Rotten Tomatoes and IMDB, Little Mermaid live action fans on twitter are preparing for war and started creating multiple accounts on both sites.

I think we can expect many 1 and 10 stars on its IMDb score then.

To answer your question about Hook, well it was never established that he didn’t know, we merely saw him & crew wandering and then got caught up in the moment, plus, well it had been a long time since he would’ve known and more then perhaps didn’t really have a need to go there beforehand......